My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-17-1986 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1986
>
11-17-1986 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/18/2024 10:06:35 AM
Creation date
1/18/2024 10:00:41 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
186
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
localities routinely employ a variety of land use devices to preclude the Installation of effective amateur antennas. Including height restrictions, conditional use permits, building setbacks and dimensional limitations on <br />antennas. It sees a declaratory ruling of Federal preemption as necessary <br />to cause municipalities to accommodate amateur operator needs In land use <br />planning efforts, <br />15. James C. 0* ^n attorney who has represented several <br />amateurs before local authorities, said that requiring amateurs to <br />seek variances or special jse approval to erect reasonable antennas unduly <br />restricts the operation of amateur stations. He suggested that the <br />Commission preempt zoning ordinances which Impose antenna height limits of <br />less than 65 feet. He said that this height would reprasent a reasonable <br />accommodation of the communication needs of most amateurs and the <br />legitimate concerns of local zoning authorities. <br />Opposing Comments <br />16. The City of La Mesa, California has a zoning regulation which <br />controls amateur antennas. Its comments reflected an attempt to reach <br />a balanced view. <br />This regulation has neither the Intent, nor the <br />effect, of precluding or Inhibiting effective and <br />reliable communications. Such antennas may be <br />built as long as their cons'fructlon does not <br />•unreasonably block views cr constitute eyesores. <br />The reasonable assumption Is that there are always <br />alternatives at a given site for different <br />placement, and/or methods for ae;thetic treatment. <br />Thus, both public objectives of controlling land <br />use for the public health, safety, and convenience, <br />and providing an effective communications network, <br />can be satisfied. <br />A blanket ruling to completely set aside local <br />control, or a ruling which '^ecognlzes control only <br />for the purpose of safety of antenna construction, <br />would be contrary to ... legitimate local <br />control. <br />17. Comments from the County of San Diego state; <br />While we are aware of the benefits provided by <br />amateur operators, we oppose the Issuance of a <br />preemption ruling which would elevate *antenna <br />effectiveness* to a position above all other <br />considerations. We must, however, argue that the <br />a ei»««
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.